Who We Are For more than 20 years, we have believed the key to preparing student for a successful future is providing rigorous and relevant instruction.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Five -Year Strategic Title I School Plan. Session Objectives Review the five year components utilizing the rubric Organize actions steps to meet the requirements.
Advertisements

North Carolina Educator Evaluation System. Future-Ready Students For the 21st Century The guiding mission of the North Carolina State Board of Education.
Center of Excellence in Leadership of Learning October 5, 2010.
Briefing: NYU Education Policy Breakfast on Teacher Quality November 4, 2011 Dennis M. Walcott Chancellor NYC Department of Education.
Common Core State Standards OVERVIEW CESA #9 - September 2010 Presented by: CESA #9 School Improvement Services Jayne Werner and Yvonne Vandenberg.
POSTER TEMPLATE BY: Increasing Student Growth and Achievement A Systems Approach: Improving Our Teacher Evaluation System Dawn.
Implementing the CCSS Through Coaching Atomic Conference December 2, 2014.
Kansas accreditation is:  1.A school improvement plan  2.An external assistance team  3.Local assessments aligned with state standards  4.Teachers.
1 Why is the Core important? To set high expectations – for all students – for educators To attend to the learning needs of students To break through the.
Debbie C. Hester Austin ISD July 9 & 11, 2012 Texas Turnaround Center.
Student Learning Objectives 1 Implementing High Quality Student Learning Objectives: The Promise and the Challenge Maryland Association of Secondary School.
Elizabeth A. Clark, Ed.D. Associate Superintendent Curriculum and Instruction.
Southern Regional Education Board HSTW An Integrated and Embedded Approach to Professional Development and School Improvement Using the Six-Step Process.
Instruction aligned to Iowa Core: What does it look like? #CCSS.
Presentation for. Powered by New Leaders and Pearson Transform Principal Practice Evidence-based Research-based Lead So Students Can Soar Real Challenges.
Leading Change Through Differentiated PD Approaches and Structures University-District partnerships for Strengthening Instructional Leadership In Mathematics.
Common Principles of Effective Practice (CPEP)
Leadership: Connecting Vision With Action Presented by: Jan Stanley Spring 2010 Title I Directors’ Meeting.
INSTRUCTIONAL EXCELLENCE INVENTORIES: A PROCESS OF MONITORING FOR CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT Dr. Maria Pitre-Martin Superintendent of Schools.
Reaching for Excellence in Middle and High School Science Teaching Partnership Cooperative Partners Tennessee Department of Education College of Arts and.
Maryland’s Journey— Focus Schools Where We’ve Been, Where We Are, and Where We’re Going Presented by: Maria E. Lamb, Director Nola Cromer, Specialist Program.
Sharing in Leadership for Student Success DeAnn Huinker & Kevin McLeod, UWM Beth Schefelker, MPS 18 April 2008.
DeAnn Huinker, UW-Milwaukee MMP Principal Investigator 26 August 2008 This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under.
Teacher Effectiveness Pilot II Presented by PDE. Project Development - Goal  To develop a teacher effectiveness model that will reform the way we evaluate.
Turning Rigor and Relevance Into Reality Jim Warford, ICLE Senior Advisor Keynote Speaker.
ISLN Network Meeting KEDC SUPERINTENDENT UPDATE. Why we are here--Purpose of ISLN network New academic standards  Deconstruct and disseminate Content.
Lenoir County Public Schools SIOP Leadership Meeting for Planning, Support, and Implementation February 3, 2011 Rochelle Middle School.
FEBRUARY KNOWLEDGE BUILDING  Time for Learning – design schedules and practices that ensure engagement in meaningful learning  Focused Instruction.
Student Achievement Partners – Who We Are 1 Who we are: SAP is a nonprofit organization founded by three of the contributing authors.
Expeditionary Learning Queens Middle School Meeting May 29,2013 Presenters: Maryanne Campagna & Antoinette DiPietro 1.
CULTURES OF COACHING AND MENTORING Principal’s role in Coaching and Mentoring teachers.
TPEP Teacher & Principal Evaluation System Prepared from resources from WEA & AWSP & ESD 112.
Instructional Coaching February 1, Welcome! Please Do Now: Take 2 minutes to write 3 lines: How would you define Instructional Coaching? What is.
Vision Statement We Value - An organization culture based upon both individual strengths and relationships in which learners flourish in an environment.
Activity 1 Systems of Professional Learning Module 5 Grades K–5: Focus on Deepening Implementation.
UPDATE ON EDUCATOR EVALUATIONS IN MICHIGAN Directors and Representatives of Teacher Education Programs April 22, 2016.
APR 2014 Report: Data, Analysis and Action Plan for Full Accreditation.
Tri City United Public Schools August 6, 2013 “Leading for educational excellence and equity. Every day for every one.”
Developed in partnership with the Montgomery County Public Schools (MD), Forward is a K–5 instructional system of services, tools, and curriculum. Forward.
PLC’s and Professional Development Kick Start Monday, August 11, 2015.
DO PRINCIPAL SUPERVISORS MATTER? BUILDING THE CAPACITY OF AREA SUPERINTENDENTS National Principal Supervisor Summit May 2016.
Richard Woods, Georgia’s School Superintendent “Educating Georgia’s Future” gadoe.org Quality Comprehensive Improvement System Key School Performance Standards.
Bringing it All Together Focus on Curriculum Development & Instructional Delivery Focus on Instructional Practices Focus on Instructional Alignment Where.
School Building Leader and School District Leader exam
National Summit for Principal Supervisors Building the Capacity of Principals to Lead the Improvement of Instruction A Presentation by the Charlotte.
A Forum at the Center for Improving Research Evidence (CIRE)
Instructional Practice Guides Reflecting on Practice
Professional Development: Imagine Difference Shapes and Sizes
Phyllis Lynch, PhD Director, Instruction, Assessment and Curriculum
NC State Improvement Project
District Accreditation
Building a Framework to Support the Culture Required for Student Centered Learning Jeff McCoy | Executive Director of Academic Innovation & Technology.
Southern Regional Education Board Annual Leadership Forum
Jeff McCoy, Executive Director of Academic Innovation & Technology
Instructional Personnel Performance Appraisal System
Instructional Personnel Performance Appraisal System
Partnering for Success: Using Research to Improve the Lowest Performing Schools June 26, 2018 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.
Success for All Foundation
OLAC Beliefs/Assumptions
Exploring The Power of C!
Gary Carlin, CFN 603 September, 2012
School Improvement Planning that increases CCRPI Scores!
Northwest ISD Elementary Education District Effectiveness Report
Buena Vista School District April 3, 2017
Exploring The Power of C!
Instructional Personnel Performance Appraisal System
Linking Evaluation to Coaching and Mentoring Models
Model Schools Contract Revision
2. Improve a positive school wide culture
Instructional Personnel Performance Appraisal System
Presentation transcript:

Huntsville City Schools Building a Culture to Support Instructional Excellence

Who We Are For more than 20 years, we have believed the key to preparing student for a successful future is providing rigorous and relevant instruction. Who We Are Speak to the history, knowledge, and thought leadership of ICLE. For over 25 years, the International Center for Leadership in Education (ICLE) has partnered with schools and districts to equip today’s educators in preparing students for lifelong success. By identifying innovative practices from across the country, we ensure those practices make a positive impact on student learning, by sharing them with educators through our conferences and keynote presentations and helping schools bring them to scale with professional learning courses, job-embedded coaching, and hands-on consultation. Driven by our belief that instruction must be rigorous and relevant for all students we partner with schools and districts to make best practices and innovative approaches to instruction and leadership a reality in today’s classrooms.

The Daggett System has been significantly informed by Observing and disseminating best practices. For more than 20 years, the International Center has been assisting leadership and teachers, as well as identifying, studying, and showcasing America’s most successful schools—including its CCSSO-co-sponsored Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation-funded research on thousands of America’s most effective and most rapidly improving exemplar schools and school districts—at the annual Model Schools Conference and other events. Current and past research conducted by some of the most respected thought-leaders in K-12 education, including John Hattie’s Visible Learning, InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards, Sutton Trust Toolkit of Strategies to Improve Learning, Robert Marzono’s work, Charlotte Danielson’s The Framework for Teaching, Focused on Student Success: A Five-Year Research Study of Models, Networks, and Policies to Support and Sustain Rigor and Relevance for ALL Students

The Daggett System for Effective Instruction

Collaborative Instructional Review CIR Rubrics

Coaching Process Pre-Visit Visit Debrief Apply Coaching Process Individual and team job-embedded coaching for leadership and instructional teams builds upon the skills and knowledge gained in professional learning courses described above. Our coaches—all of whom are experienced education leaders and educators—partner with your leadership and instructional teams to offer personal guidance and support in identifying priorities and developing skills. The ICLE four phase coaching process includes: Pre-visit Meeting: During the pre-visit meeting, the International Center coach and leader sit down with the teacher to discuss the standards-aligned lesson that will be observed during the classroom visit. Using the pre-observation form submitted by the teacher, the leader facilitates a collaborative conversation to build understanding, clarify expectations, establish the focus for the classroom visit, and review the criteria in the rubrics that will be used during the visit. Classroom Visit: During the visit, the International Center coach and leader will observe classroom instruction. Guided by the online tool, the leader identifies and documents evidence of rigor, relevance, and engagement in the lesson which will inform the observation report and debrief discussion. During the classroom visit, the coach and leader observe how teachers deliver instruction and how students react to the instruction. Debrief: The coach and leader will meet with the teacher to review findings and provide meaningful formative feedback focused on rigor, relevance, and engagement for that specific lesson. Through a collaborative discussion about the rubric and notes from the observation report, leaders support the teacher in action planning and applying targeted and actionable feedback in the classroom, fostering a collaborative relationship in which the teacher feels supported rather than evaluated. Application: Collaboratively, the ICLE coach, principal and the teacher reflect on prior feedback and apply what they have learned to future lessons.

Huntsville City Implementation Plan Keynote with Dr. Bill Daggett Aligning the Arrows to Support a Culture of Rigorous Learning – Foundational Learning and Coaching for School Leadership Teams 4 days of professional learning and 6 days of site-based leadership coaching Collaborative Instructional Review – Foundational Learning and Coaching for Coaches and Teacher Leaders math an literacy Includes 4 days of professional learning and 4 days of coaching for 8 cohorts of up to 10 educators (80 total educators)

Success Data: Henry Co, VA (2016-17) 2017 Virginia SOL Reading Scores

Success Data: North Kansas City (2012-17) By the all of 2015, APR score up from 77% to 97.9%. As of 2017, graduation rates are almost 98% - the highest in district history. Math scores increased significantly: in Grade 4, achievement scores jumped from 44% in 2014 to 72% in 2016 in advanced or proficient categories and from 55% to 65% in the same categories in Grade 5, outperforming the state by 19% and 18% respectively.

Success Data: Spring Branch ISD, TX (2011- 2016)   By 2016, SBISD had achieved a score of 92 in Student Achievement (target score 60), a 31 in Student Progress (target score 17), a 50 in Closing Performance Gaps (target score 30), and a 90 in Postsecondary Readiness (target score 60).